Talk:Mascarene grey parakeet

Latest comment: 11 years ago by Jimfbleak in topic GA Review
Featured articleMascarene grey parakeet is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 30, 2019.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 17, 2013Good article nomineeListed
August 8, 2015Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Orphaned references in Thirioux's Grey Parrot

edit

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Thirioux's Grey Parrot's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Lost Land":

  • From Mauritius Blue Pigeon: Cheke, A. S.; Hume, J. P. (2008). Lost Land of the Dodo: an Ecological History of Mauritius, Réunion & Rodrigues. T. & A. D. Poyser. ISBN 978-0-7136-6544-4.
  • From Dodo: Cheke, A. S.; Hume, J. P. (2008). Lost Land of the Dodo: an Ecological History of Mauritius, Réunion & Rodrigues. New Haven and London: T. & A. D. Poyser. pp. 22–115. ISBN 978-0-7136-6544-4.

Reference named "Extinct Birds":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 11:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mascarene Grey Parakeet/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jimfbleak (talk · contribs) 14:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

You obviously know the ropes, so just nitpicking on the assumption you'll go to FAC eventually. I made these edits, please check, but note that another editor made several edits before mine.

Yep, I requested a copy edit just in case, so now it's all converging... FunkMonk (talk) 14:46, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • ...along with other Mascarene parrots — perhaps ...other parrots from the islands to avoid a third occurrence of Mascarene
Fixed. FunkMonk (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • Subfossil bones, thought to be of the Mascarene Grey Parakeet, found on Mauritius, — perhaps Subfossil bones, found on Mauritius and thought to be of the Mascarene Grey Parakeet, ,
Fixed. FunkMonk (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • central one being longest. — are there one or two central feathers. Usually tail feathers are paired
Pluralised. FunkMonk (talk) 15:48, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • congeners in other osteological — couple of links maybe?
Fixed. FunkMonk (talk) 14:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • belonging to the genus Coracopsis by a few authors. — e.g.?
I was thinking of citing those authors, also to give their rationale (parrots of that genus are grey and black, so I guess that's why), but the claims were made in obscure, 19th century French papers, so might be hard to track down... FunkMonk (talk) 14:48, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
  • the "squeeze and whack" tale is told so often in the text and the quotes that I felt I was being beaten round the head too.
Removed one redundant quote, is it enough? FunkMonk (talk) 14:45, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'll have another read through tomorrow Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:21, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I'll fix these issues soon. As for FA, I think it might be a bit on the scrawny side, or what do you think? FunkMonk (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! FunkMonk (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
Well, there's no minimum size for FAC, and in fact my current co-nominated bird FAC starts by saying how little we know about the obscure Polynesian Nauru Reed Warbler. In the end it's your call. Anyway, let's do the deed Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

GA review (see here for criteria)

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  


 Guild of Copy Editors
 This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.